Apophenia

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Klaus Conrad
Tell me about
your mother

Psychology
Icon psychology.svg
For our next session...
Popping into your mind
Any fact becomes important when it's connected to another.
—Umberto Eco, Foucault's Pendulum

Apophenia is the experience of seeing meaningful patterns or connections in random or meaningless data. The term was coined by neurologist Klaus Conrad (1905–1961) in his 1958 publication on the beginning stages of schizophrenia, and defined as the "unmotivated seeing of connections."[1]

Variations[edit]

Apophenia is the term of art generally used in psychology for this phenomenon. However, there have been a number of other coinages of similar or related concepts in academic and popular discourse.

  • Carl Jung's "synchronicity," which is itself a form of apophenia. Jung believed that coincidental events with some symbolic significance were actually meaningful.[2]
  • In statistics, getting a positive, or significant, result and thus rejecting the null hypothesis when there is no actual pattern is referred to as a "Type I error."[3]
  • Michael Shermer coined the term "patternicity" to describe apophenia.[4]
  • The general term "pattern-seeking" is sometimes used synonymously with apophenia.

Types of apophenia[edit]

Many superstitions are the result of apophenia.

Some phenomena classified under the general umbrella of apophenia include:

Other psychological phenomena may affect apophenia as well. By selecting data, consciously or unconsciously, apophenia can include hindsight bias, where seemingly meaningful events are interpreted as having "obviously" led to the present situation. Priming a stimulus will increase the likelihood that it will be "seen" or noticed even when it isn't actually there. A feeling of a loss of control can also increase the detection of false patterns in random data such as visual noise and stock market reports.[5]

Evolutionary explanation[edit]

The explanation put forth by evolutionary psychologists for apophenia is that it is not a defect of human cognition, but rather a feature that is selected. This is due to the asymmetrical cost of Type I and Type II (not recognizing a pattern that does exist) errors. For example, someone might hear a noise that sounds like a predator growling. If the person believes that it is a predator, but it's just the wind, the cost is only losing a moment's travel time to stand on guard. If the person believes that it is just the wind and it actually is predator, the cost is the person's life.[note 1] Research in this topic generally falls under "Error Management Theory."[7][8] The propensity for apophenia has also been demonstrated in animals, such as in B.F. Skinner's research on superstition in pigeons.

External links[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. This game theoretical description is used in a number of evolutionary explanations of apophenia, such as hyperactive agency detection.[6]

References[edit]

  1. It's All Connected: What links creativity, conspiracy theories, and delusions? A phenomenon called apophenia. by Katy Waldman (Sept 16, 2014 4:09 PM) Slate.
  2. Synchronicity (27-Oct-2015) The Skeptic's Dictionary.
  3. Type I and Type II Errors - Making Mistakes in the Justice System Intuitor.
  4. Patternicity: Finding Meaningful Patterns in Meaningless Noise by Michael Shermer (2008 December) Scientific American.
  5. Lacking Control Increases Illusory Pattern Perception by Jennifer Whitson et al. (2008) Science 322:115-117.
  6. Hyperactive Agency Detection by Steven Novella (Mar 22 2010) Neurologica Blog.
  7. Error Management Theory: Overview and Significance by Martie Haselton. In: Encyclopedia of Social Psychology, edited by Roy F. Baumesiter & Kathleen D. Vohs () 2007) SAGE Publications. ISBN 1412916704.
  8. Error management theory: a new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology by M. G. Haselton & D. M. Buss (2000) J. Pers. Soc. Pyschol. 78(1):81-91. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.1.81.